Loading...
10.07.2025 PC item MinutesCHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 7, 2025 CALL TO ORDER: Chair Noyes called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Eric Noyes, Vice Chair Steve Jobe, Jeremy Rosengren, Ryan Soller, Mike Olmstead, Dave Grover, and Katie Trevena. MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Rachel Arsenault, Associate Planner; Eric Maass, Community Development Director. PUBLIC PRESENT: Jospeh Pavelko 6580 Pleasant View Way Gayle Degler 9111 Audubon Road PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. CONSIDER A VARIANCE FOR A DECREASED FRONT YARD SETBACK FOR A PROPOSED ATTACHED DECK AT 6580 PLEASANT VIEW WAY (PLANNING CASE# 25-14) Rachel Arsenault, Associate Planner, reviewed the proposed variance, applicable city code, and the criteria for approving a variance. Chair Noyes commented that the request seemed reasonable and that the lot was a unique circumstance. Chair Noyes opened the public hearing. No speakers approached the podium. Chair Noyes closed the public hearing. Chair Noyes asked the Planning Commissioners if they had any additional thoughts or comments. The Commissioners indicated they had no additional comments. Planning Commission Minutes – September 16, 2025 2 Commissioner Trevena moved, Commissioner Jobe seconded that the Chanhassen Planning Commission motion to approve the requested decreased front yard setback, subject to the conditions of approval and adopt the attached Findings of Facts and Decision.” The motion carried with a vote of 7-0. 2. Ordinance XXX: Amending Chapter 20 to Modify Standards Associated with Accessory Structures Eric Maass, Community Development Director, presented why the accessory structure code was currently under review for potential changes. He also provided graphics to help depict what could currently be constructed within the 1,000 square feet currently allowed. This included a 4- stall garage as well as a 3-stall garage with a hobby space. He reviewed the proposed ordinance amendment for each zoning district, indicating that staff developed the proposed ordinance utilizing a property's zoning district as the basis for the square footage of accessory structures allowed, rather than calculating of lot area, as a property's lot area is more likely to change over time than its zoning classification once developed. The staff proposed ordinance recommended keeping properties zoned as Single Family Residential (RSF) to 1,000 square feet of accessory structure space, and increasing the amount to 1,100 square feet for properties zoned Rural Residential (RR) and to 1,200 square feet for properties zoned Agricultural Estate (A2). Staff utilized 100 square-foot increments based on the principle that any structure greater than 200 square feet requires a building permit, whereas another under 200 square feet is only a zoning permit. In addition to the recommended ordinance, a potential alternate option would allow properties zoned as RR to have up to 1,200 square feet and properties zoned as A2 would have up to 1,400 square feet. Both options also included the proposed agricultural exemption for agricultural buildings. Chair Noyes opened the public hearing. Gayle Degler spoke in favor of the agricultural exemption and the alternative size option to increase allowed accessory structures. Chair Noyes closed the public hearing. The Planning Commission was generally supportive of increasing the square footage allowances for properties that were zoned as either RR or A2, but held some discussion between the two alternatives presented by staff. Ultimately, the Planning Commission voiced support for the lesser of the two alternatives, noting that it would be easier to increase it in the future if a need to do so was found, versus a much more difficult task of trying to reduce the amount, and that the larger accessory structures may attract unlawful home occupations. The Planning Commission also noted that out of the community examples provided, Chanhassen was already one of the more generous communities when it came to total accessory structure size. The Planning Commission also asked some clarifying questions regarding agricultural exemptions.